2019 (7) TMI 585 - HC - Customs

Extension in respect of Export Promotion Capital Goods (EPCG) authorization - It is the grievance of the petitioners that the customs department cannot proceed against the decision of the EPCG Committee - HELD THAT - These factual aspects are brought to the notice of respondent No.2 in the reply filed by the petitioners. In such circumstances, the final decision is required to be taken by respondent No.2 adjudicating authority. The results of the adjudication by respondent No.2 being directly related to the EODC, to be issued by respondent No.4, it will be appropriate for this Court to direct respondent No.4 to consider the representations of the petitioners and the rectification letters at Annexures AD, AF, AG, AJ, AM, AA, AA1 and take a decision inasmuch as the issue of EODC in favour of petitioners in an expedite manner. Petition allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
Assailing show-cause notices seeking direction for EPCG authorization extension.

Analysis:
The petitioners challenged show-cause notices issued by respondent No.2 and No.3, requesting a direction for considering their representations dated 01.03.2017 and rectification letter dated 21.03.2017 for extending EPCG authorization. Petitioner companies engaged in packaging material manufacture were aggrieved by the notices contrary to the EPCG Committee's decision allowing transfer of authorization. The petitioners argued that the notices lacked proper consideration and emphasized the necessity of Export Obligation Discharge Certificate (EODC) issuance by respondent No.4 before any final decision. They sought a direction for expedited EODC issuance to prevent adverse consequences. On the other hand, respondents contended that the adjudicating authority must consider the objections before taking a decision, emphasizing adherence to legal procedures and timelines. They argued that the actions of respondent Nos.2 and 3 should not depend on EODC issuance by respondent No.4, urging permission to proceed as per the law.

The High Court, after hearing both parties, acknowledged the EPCG Committee's decision allowing the transfer of authorization. It recognized the petitioners' concerns regarding the customs department's actions against the Committee's decision and the importance of EODC issuance. The Court emphasized that respondent No.2, as the adjudicating authority, needed to make a final decision considering all relevant aspects, including EODC issuance by respondent No.4. Consequently, the Court directed respondent No.4 to promptly consider the petitioners' representations and rectification letters, urging an expedited decision on EODC issuance to the petitioners. Respondent No.4 was instructed to make a decision within four weeks, allowing the petitioners to submit additional documents if needed. It was clarified that respondent Nos.2 and 3 should refrain from making any final decisions until respondent No.4's decision and subsequent adjudication. The Court disposed of the writ petitions with these directions and observations, ensuring a fair and timely resolution of the matter.